Clinical information systems and healthcare patient portals are proving to be a significant waste of money. Millions of dollars are invested into developing and maintaining these platforms, often by third-party vendors, to provide patients with online access to their medical records. While the idea behind these portals is great in theory, the execution falls flat when healthcare providers continue to send massive amounts of paper copies through the mail, despite the digital system. This redundancy is both financially wasteful and environmentally harmful, especially when patients like me would prefer a paperless option.

Even more frustrating is that at my current health insurance company, I can’t even opt out of receiving paper copies. Despite several attempts to request this, I’m told there’s no way to stop the influx of mail. Now, I’m left with no choice but to purchase a $70 paper shredder just to deal with the overwhelming amount of unnecessary paperwork I receive. It feels like an outdated system where healthcare organizations are not fully committed to leveraging the digital tools they’ve invested in.

To make matters worse, the US Postal Service bears the burden of delivering all these unnecessary documents. This means taxpayers and other users of the postal system are indirectly subsidizing this inefficiency. It’s absurd that after all the time and money spent on developing patient portals, they’re not serving their purpose if the same information is just going to be mailed out anyway. It’s a huge missed opportunity for cost savings and sustainability.

For anyone curious about which platforms I’m talking about, my chart, Healow. These are the two that I have used. I’m sure there are many others, but Blue Cross is also part of the problem, they have their own custom proprietary software that you can log in and see your bill and all that stuff but they will still send you the crap in the mail. And cannot get them to stop

  • edric@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    11 hours ago

    I’m talking out of my ass, but your data is likely still there whether you choose to create an account or not; so you’re still susceptible to data breaches either way.

    • grudan@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 hours ago

      I like to hope that my data won’t be released to companies like mychart without my consent.

      • d0ntpan1c@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 hours ago

        If the doctor uses mychart, thats where they store the internal data whether you have an account or not. Its their entire computer system most of the time.

        • grudan@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 hours ago

          Yeah, a couple people are saying that, but I can’t find any information on how it’s implemented for providers. Regardless, not having an account is one less avenue for my information to be leaked. I do worry more about the doctor’s security practices (2FA, password complexity, password rotation, etc…) than my own.

          • d0ntpan1c@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            6 hours ago

            I’m sure some places use it to share info, but usually it basically becomes their entire software stack. Its like the salesforce of the health world. It does their billing, shift management, HR, CMS, everything.

      • LilB0kChoy@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        7 hours ago

        released to companies like mychart

        What does this mean? MyChart is a software solution used by many medical providers. They don’t “release” medical information to them.

        This would be like thinking someone using Office on their computer is “releasing” documents they create to Microsoft.

        • Semperverus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 hours ago

          I mean, with o365, you technically do. Your example doesn’t work as well as you think it does.

          • LilB0kChoy@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 hours ago

            It does, your willful misinterpretation doesn’t change that.

            I looked through your post history, you seem to have at least enough technical aptitude to understand that.

            • verity_kindle@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 hours ago

              That’s a bit aggressive towards someone with whom you are having a civil, anecdotal discussion. You’re not trading in explosive pagers or nuclear materials. Could you dial it back a bit?